Novak Talked To Rove

[TIN FOIL SPECIAL -I have some stuff about George Tenet as a possible source for Walter Pincus that you won't see elsewhere - it's in the UPDATES, the UNLESS, and the GULP.  Now, if the CIA chief leaked the Plame info, why are we having a criminal investigation?  Good question.  Developing...]

The NY Times has the big breakthrough story on the Plame investigation:

WASHINGTON, July 14 - Karl Rove, the White House senior adviser, spoke with the columnist Robert D. Novak as he was preparing an article in July 2003 that identified a C.I.A. officer who was undercover, someone who has been officially briefed on the matter said.

Mr. Rove has told investigators that he learned from the columnist the name of the C.I.A. officer, who was referred to by her maiden name, Valerie Plame, and the circumstances in which her husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, traveled to Africa to investigate possible uranium sales to Iraq, the person said.

After hearing Mr. Novak's account, the person who has been briefed on the matter said, Mr. Rove told the columnist: "I heard that, too."

The previously undisclosed telephone conversation, which took place on July 8, 2003, was initiated by Mr. Novak, the person who has been briefed on the matter said.

And, after skipping four paragraphs, we get this:

Asked by investigators how he knew enough to leave Mr. Novak with the impression that his information was accurate, Mr. Rove said he had heard portions of the story from other journalists, but had not heard Ms. Wilson's name.

OK, we love the timing, two years to the day after the original Novak column.

Secondly, what source would be "officially briefed"?  None of the lawyers for the various White House officials, presumably; members of Fitzgerald's team, surely; and people at the Dept. of Justice exerting a little bit of oversight, maybe.  Yes, Fitzgerald is a Special Counsel, but might the DoJ be entitled to wonder why reporters are being tossed in jail? 

The Times tells us this about the source:

The person who provided the information about Mr. Rove's conversation with Mr. Novak declined to be identified, citing requests by Mr. Fitzgerald that no one discuss the case. The person discussed the matter in the belief that Mr. Rove was truthful in saying that he had not disclosed Ms. Wilson's identity.

Fitzgerald's team has been sphinx-like for eighteen months - let's guess that it's DoJ, and a Bush-friendly leak, since the source does not think Rove is a liar.  [Kevin Drum is emphatic that the Times and WaPo have the same, Bush friendly leak].

The gist of the Times account gibes with Novak's version from Oct 1, 2003:

During a long conversation with a senior administration official, I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife. It was an offhand revelation from this official, who is no partisan gunslinger. When I called another official for confirmation, he said: "Oh, you know about it."

Well.  Who is the first official to whom Novak spoke?  Lewis Libby has been the center of a lot of subpoenas, but has cooperated, and does not appear to be in trouble, if we can believe these (possibly self-serving) leaks:

Several reporters have given limited depositions about their conversations with Libby in the days before the Novak column was published. All did so at the urging of Libby, who has told the prosecutor he heard about Wilson's wife's employment from someone in the media, according to lawyers involved in the case.

So how did Libby and Rove learn that Wilson's wife was CIA and involved with his trip? 

Both claim to have heard about if from reporters.  But is this a carefully-spun leak to the press?  Are they telling us that they *only* heard it from reporters, heard it first from reporters, or heard it from both reporters and others, such as other White House insiders?  And if there is a more complete version, did they deliver it to the prosecutor?

In addition to the "we heard it from reporters" theory, we have liked the idea that the information in the INR memo ended up circulating a bit.

Or, as another possible source, David Corn (sorry, no link yet) noted that a former CIA officer was on the NSC, and might have known Ms. Plame.

Let's ask a question of journalistic ethics - if a reporter, in chatting with Karl Rove, mentioned the Plame angle, is there any rationale at all for the reporter to claim some sort of source confidentiality protection?  I would assume not.  I will further assume that, if Karl is telling the truth, then he has named a few reporters.  Mr. Fitzgerald should have called them in for a chat.  There is no need for a subpoena, since they have no legal basis to refuse, and will prefer to avoid the publicity.

In which case, there are reporters out there who know they have given testimony to Fitzgerald that would help Rove and Lewis, and are keeping quiet - not to protect a source, not to preserve confidentiality, but, I guess, because Fitzgerald asked them too. 

This might even have made sense while the investigation was being ignored - Fitzgerald might have explained that he is trying to establish whether there was knowledge of Ms. Plame inside the White House prior to the reporters passing the news, and that he can't conduct a sensible investigation with reporters presenting a seemingly exculpatory but incomplete story to the public.

However, in the current revved-up atmosphere, I promise you - if the media is really just keeping quiet about their role in this, well, I can't imagine how I could respect our media less, but I will think of something.

And that said, I marveled that TIME magazine kept Rove's secret all through the election; well, this would explain it.

OK.  Let's try a different tack and use a reductio ad absurdum approach - if the previous scenario is too ridiculous, it can't be true.  Which means what?  That Rove told Fitzgerald he heard about it from reporters, but didn't name any reporters?  The old "I forgot" defense?  Boy, that would have been some fine effort by the Evil Genius.

Or does it mean that the Times leak is rubbish?  Could be; other leaks have sort of fizzled out.

And on the other hand, Libby seems to have named reporters and is sailing along.  Except that Judy Miller won't testify (and the WaPo linked her to Libby last fall, but seems to have retreated).

Judy, Judy, Judy - Mickey noted the peculiarity of her holding out when respected heavyweights such as Tim Russert and Walter Pincus figured out a way to cooperate.  Howard Kurtz of the WaPo ran a piece on that as well.

What might be happening?  Here is a theory I have seen floating by - Judy heard about Ms. Plame in the course of her national security digging, ran it by Libby, and here we are.  But how did Karl find out?

Another view - Cliff May said Ms. Plame's CIA job was common knowledge; Powerline relays an e-mailer saying that Andrea Mitchell said the same thing a few days ago (transcript, anyone?).  Fine, but was it common knowledge that she was involved in picking her husband for the trip?  When did that knowledge pass to the press?

One last idea - Walter Pincus has been quite forthcoming about his legal journey - he had a chat with someone (not Libby) on July 12, which he wrote about on October 12, 2003.  His source then identified himself to the prosecutor, so Pincus agreed to cooperate:

Pincus added, "My case is different than the other reporters because I wrote about the conversation I had with my source [in The Washington Post]. And my source came forward to Fitzgerald.  And when a source discloses himself to a prosecutor and then releases you from confidentiality with that prosecutor, I don't think a reporter has a leg to stand on." 

Legally or ethically? "Both," Pincus responded. "I have a law degree. The privilege doesn't belong to the reporter. It belongs to the source. We're citizens like everyone else."

..."I don't believe in waivers," Pincus said. "But a source can do anything he wants to do. When a source comes forward, who are you protecting?"

Yes, who is he protecting?  Why doesn't Pincus write about it, and share the secret with the public?  What about *our* right to know whether Bush is harboring a lying criminal, or the press and the partisan Democrats are simply enjoying a summer scandal?

Novak, Pincus, Russert, Kessler, Miller - none of them should be allowed to talk about anything else until they explain their role in this.  And I suspect there are other reporters who were never subpoenaed, as explained above - its time to hear from them, too.

And sometime soon, if we are going to start a contest of grand jury leaks, Rove and Libby need to think about annoying Fitzgerald and talking to us as well.

Let's add that Fitzgerald had, until now, done a good job of lowering the cone of silence on this investigation.  However, it looks as if the Cooper e-mail was a "Get Karl" leak, and this latest may be a "Save Karl" leak (could it be a "Hit 'em while he's down" leak?  Am I facing the wrong way? - this leak looks good for Karl from where I am hiding).  [Steve Soto also sees these as Bush-friendly leaks.  OK, add him to Drum.]

This sort of to-and fro-ing is what Fitzgerald wanted to avoid, but it appears that he is losing control, of the folks not in his office, anyway.

UPDATE:  That was some prediction about loss of control - the AP and the WaPo chat with lawyers close to the investigation, and here we go.  But these leaks don't fully square with the Times, and have ghastly bits:

The AP: 

Rove told the grand jury that by the time Novak had called him, he believes he had similar information about Wilson's wife from another reporter but had no recollection of which reporter had told him about it first, the source said.

The WaPo:

The lawyer, who has knowledge of the conversations between Rove and prosecutors, said President Bush's deputy chief of staff has told investigators that he first learned about the operative from a journalist and that he later learned her name from Novak.

Rove has said he does not recall who the journalist was who first told him that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, or when the conversation occurred, the lawyer said.

Oh my goodness - we are going with the "I Forgot" defense.  Oh, boy.  Look, the question of how Karl learned this is important.  Think, Karl!  Be the genius we know you are!

UNLESS:  Well, maybe these Bush-friendly leakers were focusing on the Novak angle.  Since the Times said "journalists", plural, and the other two say "journalist", singular, maybe this detail was getting short shrift as an afterthought.  Maybe the leak was "Karl heard it from several journalists, named tham all, but couldn't remember which he heard it from first".  Maybe.  Well, if these were meant to be friendly leaks, and they are scaring their friends, we can look for clarification.  [And grammar mavens are telling me that, as written, neither the AP nor the WaPo versions rule out the interpretation of "Karl heard it from several, but forgets which", assuming that the reporter was not straining to communicate that distinction.  Well, if Karl didn't forget, than I am having a good day.]

And Walter Pincus' secret source could fly in and set us all straight.  The X-man might be Novak's first source; if so, then presumably, he also talked to Fitzgerald about his chat with Novak; maybe the White House is teeing him up for a summer at the beach (and an autumn raking leaves, a winter shoveling snow...)

(Yes, "X-Man" is short for "Deus Ex Machina Man" in this telling.  And a commenter suggests Medal of Freedom winner George Tenet, who might well have spoken with Novak; Hmm - the CIA criminal referral advanced without him, and he did not mention the scandal to Bush until October.  Well, is Tenet the sort of guy who would have long talks with old hands like Novak and Pincus?  Yes, he is...  And mightn't he put out a line of, "Hey, don't blame *me*for that messed up trip?"  Yes, he might...  But then why are we having a criminal investigation?  Surely the head of the CIA can de-classify and leak this.  But what if he only talked to Pincus and Miller, but not Novak?  Worth thinking about.)

GULP:  Pincus' X-Man appears on Sept 30, and then again on Oct 12, 2003:

On July 12, two days before Novak's column, a Post reporter was told by an administration official that the White House had not paid attention to the former ambassador's CIA-sponsored trip to Niger because it was set up as a boondoggle by his wife, an analyst with the agency working on weapons of mass destruction. Plame's name was never mentioned and the purpose of the disclosure did not appear to be to generate an article, but rather to undermine Wilson's report.

That Oct 12 mention earned Mr. Pincus a subpoena, which was reported upon.  But check this update from Nov. 26, 2004:

One current or former administration official has told Fitzgerald that he or she had a conversation with Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus on Saturday, July 12, Pincus has said publicly. Pincus also has said his source was not Libby. Pincus has previously said that an administration official told him that day that Wilson's trip to Niger was set up as a boondoggle by his CIA-employed wife.

Emphasis added.  George Tenet became a "former" Administration official on June 3, 2004 (effective 7/11/2004), under odd circumstances.  That said, Colin Powell is gone, other top CIA people are gone - lots of people stepped down after the election.

Still More:  Extrapolating from the Sept 30 article, Pincus received a call on Saturday, the day after Tenet issued his July 11 statement taking the blame for the 16 Words and explaining a bit about Joe Wilson.

So why did an Administration official call Pincus on Saturday morning? Maybe because they did not like the Post's reporting of Friday's events.

And by happy coincience, here is the July 12 piece, with a byline of Walter Pincus and Dana Milbank.

Next step - see how the WaPo reported it, and see who might have felt like they needed to help Walter's perspective on the Niger trip.  And FWIW, here is what Pincus wrote on July 13, after his chat with the X-man.

Well, the headlines tell the story - July 12 is "Bush, Rice Blame CIA for Iraq Error"; July 13 is the CIA pushback, with "CIA Got Uranium Reference Cut in Oct. / Why Bush Cited It In Jan. Is Unclear".

Hard to believe Colin Powell called Pincus just to bail out the CIA.  Hard to believe Rove  would call Pincus on Saturday morning and tell him to go easy on the CIA and pound the White House a bit.  Easy to believe that a senior CIA official, now retired, called his old pal Pincus to set the record straight on the 16 Words and the Niger trip, and mentioned Wilson's wife in passing.  How about that.

So, if Tenet leaked to Pincus, is Rove a criminal for leaking to Novak?  Interesting.  And who was Novak's first source?  Who is Dame Miller protecting?  Also Tenet?  Might be worth checking her bylines.  Developing...

And here we go - Ms. Miller, with David Sanger on July 23, told us that "Stephen J Hadley, deputy national security adviser and key behind-the-scenes player in Bush White House, accepts blame for allowing faulty intelligence to appear in State of the Union address".

Well, Mr. Hadley always belonged in the mix as a member of the White House Iraq Group who was both informed about the Niger trip and busy explaining the 16 Words debacle to the press, so he could have been a source to either Novak or Pincus.  But he is hardly a "former" official.

YELLOW FLAG:  Eventually I will run down the article where Pincus explained that he didn't use the bit about Wilson's wife because he didn't believe it.  Didn't believe Tenet?  Maybe it is a source-disguising head fake.  Maybe.

IRRESISTIBLE CHEAP SHOT, or "We All Live In A Yellow Submarine": David Corn's "Time for Rove Withdrawal" explained that, as of July 8, this scandal was likely to fade from sight:

With the Miller and Cooper cases resolved, we will be left with no new tea leaves to read. Fitzgerald's investigation will proceed under the cloak of secrecy that covers (or is supposed to cover) all federal criminal probes.

So while it's been an exciting time for anyone yearning for details about Fitzgerald's work or for anyone wishing ill for Rove, those days may be over, as the investigation, like a submarine that occasionally has to surface, dives back into the deep, dark water.

Hey, it made sense when he wrote it!

OTHER:  Timothy Noah at Slate can't figure out why the Times is so timid with its editorials.  Maybe Mickey can alert him to (without endorsing!) the "Judy Miller is protecting Rove" theory - boy, if the Times called for Rove to resign, and we later learned that their reporter had exculpatory evidence, how over would it be for them?

MORE: Bits of media criticism of the Times article:

Finally, they note that discrediting Wilson was a goal.  Breakthrough stuff.

But they are continuing their "Gotcha" game with the President here:

In June 2004, at Sea Island, Ga., soon after Mr. Cheney met with investigators in the case, Mr. Bush was asked at a news conference whether "you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found" to have leaked the agent's name.

"Yes," Mr. Bush said. "And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts."

Don't vex me!  The reporter incorrectly restated Bush's pledge, as noted here.  Although one might argue that Bush was assenting to the restatement, one might just as reasonably argue that Bush was saying "Yes, I stand by *MY* pledge".  And the original pledge mentioned violations of the law.

 

 

Comments

[aaron]

"And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts."

Supports the argument that Bush was reaffirming HIS pledge.

[RiverRat]

Cliff May Today "Corn Did It"

Wilson was his source!

[Seven Machos]

Rider -- I hope you are enjoying your time here, spinning these grand theories. The fact is that no government official is going to charged with any crime. This is because no crime was committed.

Your waxing about agents and assets being compromised is simply untrue. It did not happen. There is no evidence that it happened.

Valerie Plame was a pencil pusher in a large bureacracy who happened oppose the Iraq war very strongly.

[The Kid]

Since a grand jury is involved, the investigator cannot keep the referring agency apprised of the status of the investigation.

The point of the Novak-Rove, Cooper-Rove, Libby-Whomever contacts was that Wilson was not sent as he said he was -- at the request of Cheney or Tenet -- but by someone in the bowels of the CIA, with the involvement (suggestion or authorization or urging or demand) of his wife. It’s not simply the fact that she worked for the CIA, but the fact that she was involved in getting her old man out of town. And we know from the SSIC report that she was involved, contrary to Wilson’s representations. Neither Rove nor Libby nor Whomever likely had reason to believe that Plame’s role was that of a covert agent – she’d not been one for years, had not been one for her entire married life to Wilson, etc. Few if any of her co-workers at Langley probably knew.

The only person involved in this whole mess who might have know of Plame’s background is Judith Miller because of her interest in the MidEast in general and WMD and Jihad in particular, as well as roles as NYT Cairo bureau chief and NYT Washington bureau chief before moving to New York City.

Novak surely had a Homer Simpson moment (D’oh!) when the covert issue came up after publication of his Bastille Day 2003 column.

Let me also emphasize and add to a point made above – the only man in Washington environs who had the information disclosed in the AP, NYT, and WaPo articles, who fits the characterization / description the authors cited as sources, and who could do so legally is Rove’s lawyer, Luskin. Everybody else would be violating grand jury rules on secrecy and could be prosecuted or sanctioned.

[Seven Machos]

And one more thing so many conspiracy-minded leftists don't seem to understand: just because you work for the CIA, it doesn't follow that you are covert.

Are the janitors at Langley covert janitors? There's a Burger King in there, you know. Do they make special covert Whopppers?

[vnjagvet]

I still go back to basics. Let us assume (a) Ms. Plame was still in an undercover status with the CIA; and (b) that sometime during the five years prior to July 13, 2003 she had been on overseas assignment; and (c) either her status as an undercover agent or her assignment overseas were classified.

[I say "assume this" because I do not think either the fact that Mrs. Joseph Wilson was "Valerie Plame" was a secret or the fact that she worked openly as a non-covert CIA analyst at Langley was a secret]

Is there any evidence that Rove (or Novak for that matter) exposed (a), (b) or (c) on or after July 8, 2003?

It seems to me no disclosure of any of those things was made by anyone untll Wilson claimed his wife was "outed". At that point, her undercover status, if any, was exposed.

Where in any of the printed stories up to that point or the phone conversations were anything about Plame's undercover foreign service assignments or undercover status exposed or discussed?

I submit nowhere. Where do I go wrong?

[RiverRat]

So the whole thing hangs on a name and 1 word. Would someone point out where Novak "outed" Plame as a NOC? I suggest you all read Cliff May at NRO to find out who really "outed" Plame. I provided the link above.

From Novak's original Column:

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me.

[byrd]

So Tom, if this pans out, are you going to set up a page where all the lefties who called so many of us hypocrites for not immediately demanding Rove's firing can post their apologees? Maybe post pictures with their heads tilted just a bit?

Two Rope-a-Dopes in a month. Good god that man's an evil genius!

[Jeff]

The Kid -- Here we go again. Wilson did not say he was sent at the request of Cheney or Tenet. Read his op-ed. Here's what he said: "In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report. While I never saw the report, I was told that it referred to a memorandum of agreement that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake — a form of lightly processed ore — by Niger to Iraq in the late 1990's. The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president's office."

And you know what? Best as we can tell, Cheney DID ask questions that led the CIA to have Wilson travel to Niger. See, for instance, the SSCI report, pp. 38-39.

As for his wife, could you please provide citation/link to what you have in mind as far as Wilson's claims.

I suspect you're right about Luskin. Swopa at needlenose.com suggests that Rove is essentially sending a message publicly to Novak et al that their original story remains in place. This is quite plausible, IF you buy Murray Waas' reporting.

TM, great find, it sounds like it is Tenet. So much for the CIA v. the rest of the Bush administration theory, or not?

[Rider]

"Valerie Plame was a pencil pusher in a large bureacracy who happened oppose the Iraq war very strongly."

Right. That's why the CIA brought charges. That's why the investigation is still rolling, too. No crime was committed but these people all just like working together and interviewing famous people.

So what do you think, Fitzgerald is investigating Plame?

Now, all the covert agents who worked for Plame's CIA cover firm who got outed when her maiden name appeared in Novak's column, were they all pencil pushers who were opposed to the war too? So it was OK to out them also?

Novak, you will recall, asked the CIA if there would be any problem in revealing Plame's name. They told him not to do it! But he did it anyway, because they didn't offer any reasons. The reason they couldn't explain is because revealing her maiden name meant outing a top secret company that was still in operation. I hope you are beginning to get the picture of what's involved here so it does not come as a big shock when the indictments come down.

[Rider]

You know Rove attends the same church as the Wilsons. He has never offered one word of apology to them for what he did. His stooges are now claiming for him that it was an accident, unintentional. If that were true, don't you think we could expect him to have the decency to at least offer his apologies? No, he's saying he made a mistake and damned proud of it, too.

[TexasToast]

So Tom, if this pans out, are you going to set up a page where all the lefties who called so many of us hypocrites for not immediately demanding Rove's firing can post their apologees? Maybe post pictures with their heads tilted just a bit?

Byrd

This is just Karl's lawyer telling us Karl's (massaged) version of his "chat with Matt". Let's talk after we read Matt's version in Time. He said he didn't want to scoop himself - so perhaps ol' Karl's trying to set the spin - so to speak?

It ain't over yet.

[Seven Machos]

Rider -- There will be no indictments. You are obviously not an attorney, nor do you know anything about how national security works. I won't even mention late-summer politics in Washington.

My theory is that you are a passionate young person who wants to Change The World. Hence, though you don't know what you are talking about, you are clearly putting forth the best arguments you can. I admire your immense effort. You got spunk, kid.

[peapies]

actually when you read Novak, he never says senior administration officials confirm Plame, they only confirm the premise (which he tells them?) that he was sent at his wife urging...

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. (so says Novak- which he confirmed at CIA)

Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report.

The "CIA" says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him.

---it does not sat "2 senior officials confirm Wilsons wife is Valerie Plame, who works for CPD in the CIA and she suggested he go to Niger"

[Joe]

Don't know if this helps but this">http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2003/10/10/apparent_cia_front_didnt_offer_much_cover/">this article gives some background to the tremendous investment the Agency made in Plame's cover story.

[Rider]

Thanks, Steve. No one has called me "kid" in over fifty years.

I don't want to change the world. I want Karl Rove and whoever else was involved away from classified information before they leak again.

[Joe]

Swine Link!

[peapies]

riverrat-

did you just do something to fix that broken tag? if so what did you do (for future)

[peapies]

nevermind

[peapies]

Rider--

I want Karl Rove and whoever else was involved away from classified information before they leak again.

So I presume your were scandalized by Wilson's flippant flairish talk about forgeries?

[flenser]

Rider

If I was CEO of a company, and a competing company was putting out fake stories that my companies product was crap, and an employee of my company pointed out that the story was fake, I would give that employee a pat on the back. Which I'm sure Bush has done.

And if it turned out that some of the employees in my company were leaking information to that competing company, to assist them in their smear campaign, then I would fire those employees.

I gather that many CIA people "resigned" once Goss took over control there.

Sadly, Plame has not been one of them, yet.

[peapies]

Wilson also said "my wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity."

In an interview Friday, Wilson said his comment was meant to reflect that his wife lost her ability to be a covert agent because of the leak, not that she had stopped working for the CIA beforehand....

huh? ...what? ...come again? ...One more time?

[Lesley]

Rider:

Just a guess but as far as Rove apologizing to the Wilsons (you said they attend the same church), Rove may see the situation more biblically than one might think:

"They have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind." Hosea 8:7

[Appalled Moderate]

. Did this work?

[Joe]

No

[fixed]

fixed?

[Rider]

RiverRat

The Cliff May article is surely satire. Either that or it's another "I didn't inhale" excuse.

Novak said Wilson's wife was a CIA operative and gave her maiden name, Plame, on June 14, 2003. Some days later, he continued to establish a pattern of intent by revealing her connection to Brewster Jennings & Co.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/100503D.shtml

Was she undercover at the time? No. Wash the company still operating? No. Were both of those pieces of information still classified? Yes. Did Rove have a security clearance? Yes.

Look, your side is in charge of the keys right now. Can the Republicans be trusted with the keys? Judging from how they are handling this breach of classified information, it doesn't look like it.

Memo to the President:

Get Karl Rove away from classified information YESTERDAY.

[Rider]

Lesley

Since they do belong to the same parish, it would be good if Rove would "read, mark, and inwardly digest" the following verse from Matthew:

"Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering." (Matthew 5:23-24)

[Lesley]

By George, I think I've got it!

Ring Ring

Hey Hillary, baby. Its Karl.

Hey Karl.

Sweetie pie, wouldya do me a HUGE favor and dig through those 800 FBI files you've got and give me the goods on a, uh, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson?

Sure thing, Karl.

(sound of rustling papers)

Karl, get this! His wife works undercover for the CIA.

Wow, Hil. Good stuff. A million thanks.

Anytime, Karl.

....I just couldn't resist.

[flenser]

Rider

I'll grant that if you start from the assumption that Rove deliberatly leaked classifed information in any effort to score political points, that would be a bad thing.

But your inability to understand that there are multiple question marks attached to almost every aspect of that assumption seems pretty strange.

If your lack of interest in the many other instances where it is indisputable that secret information has bee leaked is factored in, then you come across as somebody transparently attempting to score political points. In other words, you are a bit like what you imagine Rove to be.

[richard mcenroe]

Rider -- this isn't event the first time for Leahy. He had to resign the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee when one of his many many leaks from that body's confidential briefings got an American operative overseas killed. Fetch the shackles!

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

Speaking of idiots:

'If a reporter calls you and asks you to confirm classified information which you have by virtue of holding a security clearance, you are in trouble.'

Rove didn't have any information on Valerie Plame because he had a security clearance. He heard about her from a reporter prior to Novak's call. It is not illegal to tell one reporter what another reporter knows.

[peapies]

Rove: Hi Hill, it's me again...listen sweet pea...I forgot...the IRS audit too?

Hill: You got it! In the couriors hands.

Rove: U Da best doll! Caio

[Rider]

Flenser

Don't you think it would be in the best interests of the United States to AT LEAST suspend Karl Rove's security clearance until this matter is straightened out? My God, we are not playing beanbag here. Why has the President not found out this information before? Why are we reading this in the newspaper two years later? What classified information has Karl Rove had access to? What else has he leaked "unknowingly"? What other magazines has he tried to help out?

[Lesley]

Rider: Yup, that would be a tough one because I'm sure the animosity runs deep on both sides. Imagine those two men having to kneel side by side at the Communion rail.

However, I think we in the hinterlands take this jazz so personally and so passionately, and for those clowns in DC, its simply cynical old politics as usual.

We all seemingly share two things in common on this thread: a desire for accountability in our government and a grown-up enjoyment of the game of "Clue", the DC version.

[Rider]

Patrick

Yeah, unfortunately he can't remember who that other reporter was. WTF?

[peapies]

Rider

1.Yeah, unfortunately he can't remember who that other reporter was. 2.WTF?

1. how many reporters calls do you think he fields?

2. what is "is"?

[flenser]

Rider

"Why has the President not found out this information before?"

What "this" are you referring to? Did you not read my last comment, or did you not comprehend it?

There is no "this". You are ASSUMING that classifed information was leaked, AND that it was leaked by Rove. Neither of these things has been established.

Are you capable, even for a split second, of questioning your own assumptions?

Of course we are playing beanbag here. You are not remotely credible with your faux outrage over what you think Rove has done, because you are totally silent on all the other instances where classified information has been leaked over the years.

[vnjagvet]

Rider:

Since you are now carrying the water now for the Get Rove Now faction, (Martin and Juke having abandoned the field temporarily) what is the best evidence as of today that Rove exposed either Plame's undercover status or any information about any one of her undercover assignments?

Without such information, the contention that Rove "outed" her amounts to nothing more than air. Help me out here. Martin knows I'm as dense as osmium.

[RiverRat]

David Corn opened this way two days after the Novak column.

Did senior Bush officials blow the cover of a US intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security--and break the law--in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?

I challenge anyone to find any press reference to NCO status before this article. After you fail in the search remember that Wilson was Corn's source.

Wilson outed Plame;period!

[Rider]

Flenser

Are you capable for a split second of ceasing to politicize a breach of security, at least long enough to do something about it?

"This" is what was revealed in the NYT and WP articles, i.e., that Novak called Rove, asked him to confirm that Mrs. Wilson was a CIA operative, Rove confirmed it. Rove has a security clearance. He should have said, "I have no comment on that, Bob." Instead, he said, in effect, "Yes, She is a CIA agent." EVEN IF you don't think there was anything inappropriate in that, the CIA and FBI apparently do and so does the prosecutor. I don't know about you, but if I were the President, I would have Rove's ass on the carpet in a New York minute, jerk his security clearance pending the outcome of the investigation, and hopefully tell the American people what I had done to plug the potential leak.

Sure, if there are past security breaches by Democrats that haven't been investigated or that you want to mention as equally reprehensible, that's fine with me. But before we get into that, for the love of God stop the political discourse long enought to get that man away from classified information.

The trouble is that you have let Karl Rove play with your heads for so long, you cannot stop seeing everything and everyone as political. You now believe that the light does not shine on the Democrat side of the aisle. How could Karl Rove possibly have done anything to hurt America? After all, he's a Republican!

[RiverRat]

Would we be here if Novak had written: Valerie Plame, CIA employee or CIA analyst?

Sure we would! Why? Because Wilson saw the Novak column as a huge oportunity; an oportunity to re-start a dead bureaucratic career in a Kerry administration.

His first published fellow traveler was David Corn writing in Pravda on the Potomac (aka The Nation), a rag founded by a declared communist.

[vnjagvet]

I am afraid your are overstating the evidence on the critical issues, Rider.

Exaggeration is always a sign of a bad legal argument.

[Jeff Z]

If the exposure of J Wilson's wife was so risky, why did he write an NYT op-ed about work he did for her very own department? Exposure in this situation has to be assumed. Everyone in the world concerned with this issue reads our major media--even Osama in his cave has shown in his videos that he is clearly aware of what goes on in our press. Of course Wilson would immediately become the focus of intense international interest.

Why would Wilson risk the lives of his wife and colleagues in such a way? If exposure were really so risky, the NYT could have simply run an anonymously sourced article, the way N Kristoff did on Wilson.

Be sensible. Wilson knew what would happen, and he compounded the matter by going on talk shows and granting interviews immediately afterwards. There is no way his wife's identity would have remained secret. His protests to the contrary are equivalent to that of movie stars who complain that people like to take pictures of them.

[flenser]

Rider

Mind if I ask how old you are? I get the feeling I'm trying to discuss this with a not-too-bright high schooler.

I keep pointing out that you whole argument, if thats not too strong a word for it, is founded on assumptions. You cannot refute this, so you instead repeat the same assumptions over and over.

I know what the various bits of information in the public doamin are. I know that they are all of questionable veracity. That is why we have a real investigation going on.

I know that this information in the public domain does not support your assumptions. There is zero evidence at this point that Karl Rove leaked any classifed information.

Pointing to the existence of an investigation into whether any laws were violated as proof that laws were violated makes you look stupid. For some reason this does not trouble you.

"..if there are past security breaches by Democrats that haven't been investigated or that you want to mention as equally reprehensible.."

I ask again, do you read the comments that are posted here? Are you too dense to understand them?

There are many instances of actual breaches of national security, some of which really have resulted in deaths. This is in contrast to the Plame affair, where it is vary much an open question whether anything bad has happened at all. Some of these secuity breaches have happened quite recently.

There is no evidence, zip, neda, that Karl Rove is a threat to national security. The same cannot be said for many of the members of the Senate, especially the Dem side of the house.

I will belive that you and the rest of the "liberals" are seriously concerned about national security when I see you and DailyKos demanding to know who outed the CIA airline to the NY Times, and when I see you condem the Times for publishing such information.

We both know this will never happen, so why don't you drop the act already?

[Beto Ochoa]

This entire affair is a product of the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy. Elements within the CIA have "Dirty Tricked" this administration multiple times already.
There is nothing to see here. Move along, move along.

[flenser]

Rider

"How could Karl Rove possibly have done anything to hurt America?"

I'm not aware of anyone claiming that it is impossible for Rove, or any Republican, to hurt America. For your edification, what you just did was called a "strawman argument", attributing a silly position to your opponents, which you they do not hold but which you can easily knock down.

The question, and this is what you have a very hard time grasping, is not whether Rove could have done somthing to hurt America. That can be answered in the affirmative for every one of us.

The real question is whether he actually has done anything to harm America. Unless your definition of America is "the Democratic party and the media", then the answer is No.

[Rider]

Wrong about my age along with a lot of other things. As I said when Steve called me "kid," no one has called me that in over fifty years. I'm considerably older than that and most people who know me, my patients and my students at any rate, address me as "Dr." You asked. May we now know how old you are?

BTW, RiverRat here's a snippet from Corn's rebuttal:

"I have rarely read a column as stupid, absurd and wrong as the one posted today by Clifford May, a former New York Times reporter who left journalism and became a spokesman for the Republican Party."

http://www.davidcorn.com/

Read the rest if you like, I frankly don't care if you do or not. You evidently suffer from attitudinosclerosis, hardening of the attitudes.

It is clear to me that you are unable to separate politics from the security issues involved here, and that's a pity, mainly for what it says about the state to which men like Karl Rove have brought us in civic discourse. I am glad that we have at least moved on from thinking the whole thing was about a trip to Niger. I'm going to leave it to Mr. Fitzgerald break the rest of it to you, what the case is really about. Happy landings!

[Walter]

When will the President take responsibility for this mess? He can't even control his White House staff, let along claim be Leader of the Free World.

[ArminTamzarian]

fix

this

now

[Stephen M. St. Onge]

Tom:

Your link to the Howard Kurtz story is wrong, it takes you to kausfiles.

[flenser]

You are a character, Rider.

Any bets on how Rider will react if FitzGerald does not tell him what he expects to hear?

"Partisan hack" is my guess.

And the follow-up. "It does not matter if a law was technically broken. It's still morally wrong for Republicans to point out Democrats lies."

Your age - good grief! If you are ever going to grow up, now would be a good time to start.

I'm amazed that you could not bring yourself to offer even tolken opposition to all the actual leaks of classifed informaton, even when repeatedly challenged to do so.

[flenser]

Armin is da man!

It's maybe worth notng one odd assumption that all the Get Rove Gang act on. This is that it is simply not possible for a journalist to leak information or out anybody. This makes no sense at all, but it's an underlying idea in everything they say.

[TM]

TM, great find, it sounds like it is Tenet. So much for the CIA v. the rest of the Bush administration theory, or not?

No, the CIA at war theory is a key part of this; as JukeBox pointed out, Tenet did send over the criminal referral, which he did not have to do.

However, Tenet was walking a tightrope between Bushand the White House, which thought he had lost control of the CIA, and the CIA, whichthought that he was letting Cheney walk all over them (and making the CIA take the fall for the 16 Words stung, too).

SO, the underlings cooked up the referral, leaked it to the press, briefed Congress, and put it on his desk (I want to check the stories, but it is plausible). Now he has to sign it, or the CIA *will* revolt.

Then he figures, well, I leaked to Pincus, not Novak, let's ride it out.

And the one Post story suggests he only came forward in Sept 2004.

Maybe it is another senior CIA guy (I know lots left, but would they count as "Adminisration" officials if they are not Pres appointments?

Well, I don't see any obvious flaw. Yet. In an UPDATE I skate past Pincus' comment that he didn't use it because he didn't believe it by saying that was a head fake to disguise his unimpeachable source. I think any theory is allowed one bad data point.

[byrd]

Texas Toast, I doubt you'll see this, but you're wrong. It's over. Josh Mashall has officially changed the subject (http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/14/172732/082). At least that's Instapundit's interpretation and after reading Marshall's bit, I have to agree.

Don't worry though, I was joking about the apology. I know enough liberals to know that if the Bush administration said the sky was blue, you'd all go to your graves insisting that it's green. Bluish tinted maybe, but still green.

[peapies]

i don't care what side of the fence you come down on, but the Cooper travesty should irk us all

from drudge

TIME'S MATT COOPER First interview Sunday morning - to discuss grand jury testimony -- on NBC's MEET THE PRESS. It'll be 'an exclusive network interview'...

this has been bothering me since his dramatic photo-op outside the grand jury, where he proclaimed he would detail all OVER THE WEEKEND. If Cooper and Time were the noble press they claim to be, then why time your tell all for the Sunday talk shows? Noble would be to get the story out, not time for maximum dramatic sales.

[RiverRat]

Rider,

BTW, RiverRat here's a snippet from Corn's rebuttal:

"I have rarely read a column as stupid, absurd and wrong as the one posted today by Clifford May, a former New York Times reporter who left journalism and became a spokesman for the Republican Party."

http://www.davidcorn.com/

Corn's response, both in this post and on Fox this morning, reminds me of Mom catching a 12 year old with his dick in left hand and a copy of Playboy in his right.

"Maa, Heff made me do it!"

Anyone know if Fitz has called Corn?

[RiverRat]

Tom,

No, the CIA at war theory is a key part of this; as JukeBox pointed out, Tenet did send over the criminal referral, which he did not have to do.

Do you have info that supports this statement. Why not some untermenschen in CPD? How do we know it wasn't Plame or her boss?...you know, kinda like the CIA version of the Cackling Canards of the Collectivist Cabal (tm)

From an inquiring mind.

[peapies]

RiverRat
---which he did not have to do.

ah yes Tenet blows off a phony referral...yes I am sure that the get rove crowd would have been satisfied with this decision...no calls of a cover-up if that were to have happened.

they don't get that virtually every special investigation involving the White House is politically commenced . some indeed to EXONERATE and PLACATE the screamers.

[Robert]

I have my tinfoil hat on tonight.

Anybody ever suggest that J. Miller is "protecting" Plame or Wilson?

[RiverRat]

Peaples,

The "did not have to do " was a quote from Tom; not my words.

I wasn't being argumentative or rhetorical. I was asking if we know who filed the claim, on what basis, and with whose approval.

It seems clear that Plame hadn't been in the field as a NOC agent for 6 years as of '03. If she was still technically under the cover of a company name that doesn't even have an office or a working phone number what kinda cover was it?

Cover designed or maintained simply for domestic political advantage by CIA bureacrats of a leftist stripe?

Again..just asking.

[diaperdude]

Head waiter? I think my democratic friends here just soiled themselves. Probably not a lower point for dem spirits than/or since, the US or the Iraqi elections.

Some will cling to their Diebold machines, crying "cheated", but perhaps the best advise,

When your in the hole, stop digging.
Fitzgerald is on a mission which may be inconsistent with the democrats psyche. Stick wilson with the bill, he's the one who will cost you more than you know.

[jukeboxgrad]

AARON

"Supports the argument that Bush was reaffirming HIS pledge."

We are now well into the "Bush didn't inhale" phase of Dubya's presidency.

RIVER

"Cliff May Today 'Corn Did It'; Wilson was his source! ... I challenge anyone to find any press reference to NCO status before this article ... Would we be here if Novak had written: Valerie Plame, CIA employee or CIA analyst?"

Yes. All this overlooks a very simple fact. Once it was published, common knowledge that Plame was a CIA employee, her cover was blown. In other words, it hardly matters that Novak "only" said "Agency operative," and not "covert operative." Corn explains this clearly.

"Corn's response, both in this post ... reminds me of ... "

You're hysterically funny. You make dismissive remarks regarding Corn's post. This tends to create the impression you actually read it. Then you say: "Anyone know if Fitz has called Corn?" You would know, if you had read the post, because in it he provides a very clear answer to that question. Humble suggestion: don't pretend you've read something if you haven't.

"Do you have info that supports this statement [Tenet did send over the criminal referral]"

Yes.

SEVEN

"no crime was committed"

A stunning endorsement for the Bush administration, which promised to "restore honor and dignity to the White House" (link): No Crime Was Committed!

Your standards are too low.

"Your waxing about agents and assets being compromised is simply untrue. It did not happen. There is no evidence that it happened."

I guess that's why her front firm had to be shut down, and that's why "Intelligence officials have said that once Plame's job as an undercover operative was revealed, other agency secrets could be unraveled and her sources might be compromised or endangered ... every foreign intelligence service would run Plame's name through its databases within hours of its publication to determine if she had visited their country and to reconstruct her activities ... That's why the agency is so sensitive about just publishing her name" (link)

You should let Fitz know "it did not happen." Funny, he seems to be convinced something did happen.

"Valerie Plame was a pencil pusher"

Ample proof of her status as a covert operative can be found here.

"just because you work for the CIA, it doesn't follow that you are covert"

Of course not. But it definitely raises the possibility. It was at best highly reckless and negligent for Rove to make any statement to reporters about any CIA employee, unless he first made some proactive effort to determine that he was not possibly placing a covert operative in jeopardy. Expecially during wartime, and especially since her specialty is WMD (Novak obviously knew this, so I am going to assume that Rove did too), an especially critical and secret area.

KID

"we know from the SSIC report that she was involved"

Let me know what makes the anonymous sources quoted in that report more credible than this source: "A senior intelligence official confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer who worked 'alongside' the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger. But he said she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment. 'They [the officers who did ask Wilson to check the uranium story] were aware of who she was married to, which is not surprising,' he said. 'There are people elsewhere in government who are trying to make her look like she was the one who was cooking this up, for some reason,' he said. 'I can't figure out what it could be ... We paid his [Wilson's] air fare. But to go to Niger is not exactly a benefit. Most people you'd have to pay big bucks to go there,' the senior intelligence official said. Wilson said he was reimbursed only for expenses."

"Neither Rove nor Libby nor Whomever likely had reason to believe that Plame’s role was that of a covert agent"

They had a duty to rule out that possibility before they decided to blab about her to reporters.

VN

"she worked openly as a non-covert CIA analyst at Langley"

She was covert op. This is documented here.

"Is there any evidence that Rove (or Novak for that matter) exposed (a), (b) or (c) on or after July 8, 2003?"

There is a world of difference between a handful of people knowing she works for the CIA, as compared with having that same information plastered across major publications because Rove was conducting an act of revenge.

"no disclosure of any of those things was made by anyone untll Wilson claimed his wife was 'outed'. At that point, her undercover status, if any, was exposed"

As I've mentioned, it doesn't matter that Novak "only" said "Agency operative," and not "covert operative." Her cover was blown as soon as major publications reported that she worked for the CIA.

"what is the best evidence as of today that Rove exposed either Plame's undercover status or any information about any one of her undercover assignments"

I just answered that question. It's not a question of saying that Rove exposed her "undercover status or any information about any one of her undercover assignments." Reporting that she works for the CIA (which a couple of reporters did, with support from Rove and perhaps others) was sufficient to blow her cover.

FLENSER

"an employee of my company pointed out that the story was fake"

Please explain why the White House needed to out Plame in order to "point[ed] out that [Wilson's] story was fake." As I said earlier, it was a WSJ reporter, oddly enough, who said: "That Ms. Plame recommended her husband doesn't undercut Mr. Wilson's credentials for the job of trying to figure out whether Saddam Hussein was seeking the raw material for a nuclear weapon in Africa."

So in what way did outing Plame serve the purpose of helping to "point[ed] out that the story was fake?" Answer: it didn't. It was done for another purpose entirely: revenge.

"if you start from the assumption that Rove deliberatly leaked classifed information in any effort to score political points, that would be a bad thing"

It would be a bad thing even if it was "only" accidental and negligent, not deliberate. And it would still be a bad thing even if it hadn't been done for very slimy and trivial political reasons.

Here's how Olbermann said something along these lines: "I damn well don’t want political morons in positions where they can deliberately screw up counter-terrorism measures. I know we already have to live with the idea that they’ll do it accidentally."

"You are ASSUMING that classifed information was leaked ... There is zero evidence at this point that Karl Rove leaked any classifed information."

Plame's cover was blown when Novak wrote that she works for the CIA. That's why the CIA, DOJ, FBI and Fitz are all worked up. Did you notice?

"that it was leaked by Rove"

Cooper says he knows Plame worked for the CIA because Rove told him. What more do you need? Also now we know that Rove also leaked to Novak (in the form of confirming something for Novak).

By the way, we don't know that Rove was the only leaker. On the contrary, we have reason to think he wasn't. But a leaker he is. And then the White House seemed to work pretty hard at covering this up for a couple of years.

"you are totally silent on all the other instances where classified information has been leaked over the years"

Point me toward the references indicating that major folks on the right were recently all worked up over those "other instances." Oh, I get it. You're only suddenly worked up about them as an attempt to distract attention from Rove.

"I know what the various bits of information in the public doamin are. I know that they are all of questionable veracity"

It would help if you were more specific. For example, maybe you're trying to say that Cooper's email has some suspicious superscripts.

"it is vary much an open question whether anything bad has happened at all"

Really?

"It's still morally wrong for Republicans to point out Democrats lies. [flenser being facetious]"

Let us know why Rove needed to take advantage of "double super secret background" in order to carry on his noble work of "point[ing] out Democrats lies." Also, let us know how Plame's work status was in any way material to Rove's noble work of "point[ing] out Democrats lies." Actually, it wasn't. It was material only with regard to Rove's noble work of exacting revenge.

While you're at it, let us know the factual basis for Rove's claim (according to Cooper) that Plame "authorized" Wilson's trip. Oh, I get it. When you're "point[ing] out Democrats lies," it's OK to tell some of your own.

Kind of like how the number one RNC talking point on this subject is a big fat lie: "Wilson Falsely Claimed That It Was Vice President Cheney Who Sent Him To Niger" (link).

PEAPLES

"Wilson said his comment was meant to reflect that his wife lost her ability to be a covert agent because of the leak"

Yes. Read the whole transcript, and you'll see that Wilson had just been asked to explain why he thought it was OK to be in Vanity Fair. This is all fully explained here. AP has now corrected a story which misinterpreted Wilson in much the way you did, I think.

"how many reporters calls do you think he [Rove] fields"

Actually, I happen to think that the number of reporters who are able to get through directly to Karl Rove is remarkably finite. He also strikes me as someone who keeps careful notes and doesn't often suffer from mysterious memory lapses. This looks to me like a suspiciously strategic memory lapse.

PATRICK

"He heard about her from a reporter prior to Novak's call. It is not illegal to tell one reporter what another reporter knows."

Really? Let's say reporter A walks down the street and trips over a package marked Top Secret. He rips it open, and finds it has all the secret passwords used to control our nuclear arsenal. Reporter A thinks this is cool, so he calls his friend Karl at the White House, and tells him the secret passwords. Karl thinks this is cool, so Karl then calls Novak, to tell him the secret passwords. As Karl is being marched off to jail, he says, but Patrick, I thought you said "It is not illegal to tell one reporter what another reporter knows!"

Maybe law school isn't such a good idea for you, after all. I realize you might want Fitz's job but I think at the rate you're going he has nothing to worry about.

JEFF Z

"If the exposure of J Wilson's wife was so risky, why did he write an NYT op-ed about work he did for her very own department?"

There's nothing in Wilson's article to suggest his wife works for the CIA. By the way, even if you decide that Wilson is a creep, liar, idiot, or even a traitor, none of this is a reason to give Rove a free pass to out a covert agent. All the effort to discredit Wilson is transparent, desperate misdirection. The fact that this effort is such a central part of Rove's current PR strategy only serves to prove how little Rove has to work with right now.

"Wilson knew what would happen"

Of course. He knew that Rove and his pals would immediately start talking with reporters in order to out Plame. Right, it's Wilson's fault that he couldn't imagine that Rove was actually that low.

TM

"However, Tenet was walking a tightrope between Bushand the White House ... "

Just for the record, I think your reasoning on this is plausible.

By the way, on this interesting subject of figuring out who the other leaker is, I think the most interesting comment on this is by Froomkin, here (scroll to the section "Freeing Judith Miller"). I think Froomkin's comment ties together two of the most mysterious pieces: what's the story with Miller, and who is the other leaker.

BYRD

"At least that's Instapundit's interpretation"

People who are able to think for themselves have long ago learned to take Glenn with a big grain of salt. Here's a recent example of how careless he is. Unfortunately, our esteemed host also got sucked in on this one.

[jukeboxgrad]

RIVER

"If she was still technically under the cover of a company name that doesn't even have an office or a working phone number what kinda cover was it? Cover designed or maintained simply for domestic political advantage by CIA bureacrats of a leftist stripe?"

A brilliant defense. Quick, call Luskin: "in BushWorld it's OK to out covert ops if they're Democrats."

[candy]

I didn't take the bait
"The July 11, 2003, e-mail between Rove and then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley is the first showing an intelligence official knew Rove had talked to Matthew Cooper just days before the Time magazine reporter wrote an article identifying Valerie Plame as a CIA officer."

"The White House turned the e-mail over to prosecutors, and Rove testified to a grand jury about it last year."

"Rove, Bush's closest adviser, turned over the e-mail as soon as prosecutors opened a criminal investigation into who leaked Plame's covert work for the CIA."
********
hmmmmm...it makes you wonder what Fitzpatrick has up his sleeve.

[candy]

Rove E-Mailed Security Official About Talk

[blogme]

"The former ambassador was selected for the 1999 trip after his wife mentioned to her supervisors that her husband was planning a business trip to Niger in the near future and might be willing to use his contacts in the region ..."

1) What was Wilson's other business reason for being in Niger?

2) Was he able to accomplish that mission while also researching the Uranium deal in his 8 days?

3) Did he have to travel back to Niger to complete his own business that seems to have been used as an excuse for him going in the first place?

Inquiring minds want to know! Is there a good answer to these questions? Or did the Wilson's make up the business trip excuse as a way of getting a fit with the job and Joe?

[Darwin]

Hrm, this is actually starting to get interesting. What I think is most fun about it is trying to figure out how many people there were, who told whom what when, etc..

=darwin

[vnjagvet]

Juke:

Do you believe there is evidence:

1. That the fact that Ms. Plame was employed by the CIA (i.e. that she worked there) was "classified information"? If so, what is that evidence?

2. That Ms. Plame's undercover status with the CIA, if any, was disclosed by Mr. Rove to anyone? If so, what is that evidence?

3. That one or more of Ms. Plame's covert assignments, if any, were disclosed by Mr. Rove to anyone? If so, what is that evidence?

[flenser]

juke

"He knew that Rove and his pals would immediately start talking with reporters in order to out Plame. "

Except that this is not what happened. Rove did not call up reporters and tell them. They called up him and told him.

If you are following this at all you must know this by now. Why do you continue to misrepresnt? (I won't say "lie").

[peapies]

candy---

yes, these little details your post points to -uhmmm cooperation uhhmmm--- are intriging and naively overlooked

[Seven Machos]

JUKEBOXGRAD

1. This may surprise you, but is not unheard of for CIA officials to develop aliases when they are abroad. Officers under non-official cover have been known to use this (admittedly sophisticated) tactic frequently. Incidentally, your treatise above assumes that clandestine CIA officers have no responsibility to maintain secrecy themselves. If, just to use a hypothetical example, you as a clandestine CIA officer send your spouse on a highly visible trip to Niger and then the spouse returns to make highly partisan charges against a sitting administration on television and in the New York Times (some of which are abject lies), it is, apparently, up to everyone else to hide pertinent facts about you. Call me crazy, but I think our spies ought to have work a little harder to protect their identities. (And by the way, Big Guy, this is all hypothetical: Valerie Plame was not a clandestine officer.)

2. Under your standards, Joe Wilson can lie about the administration but no one in the administration can tell the truth about Joe Wilson.

3. No charges will be brought against any public official. Karl Rove did nothing wrong. Furthermore, Democrats will suffer for this goofy partisan manuevering, just as the Republicans suffered for partisan manuevering on Whitewatergate and Monicagate.

[RiverRat]

Flenser,

Go ahead and say "lie" if you think it fits.

If not it would be fair to call it obsessive complusive disorder; and increasingly common disease among....

[jukeboxgrad]

BLOGME

"What was Wilson's other business reason for being in Niger?"

I'm not sure, but I think it's possible you're confusing Wilson's 1999 trip to Niger with his 2002 trip to Niger.

VN

"That the fact that Ms. Plame was employed by the CIA (i.e. that she worked there) was 'classified information'?"

Start here.

"That Ms. Plame's undercover status with the CIA, if any, was disclosed by Mr. Rove to anyone"

I will ignore you if you ignore me. I have already explained why this question is irrelevant. If you don't understand (or dispute) my explanation, say so. But please don't waste my time by pretending I haven't already addressed the question.

"3"

Ditto.

[Martin]

All the right wing freaks in one place. A great big brain-damaged barbecue. Excellent.

So when Fitzgerald said: "This case is not about a whistle-blower," "It's about potential retaliation against a whistle-blower."

What was my main man talking about?

[RiverRat]

RE DAVID CORN [Cliff May]
My friend David Corn is hopping mad and he’s calling me names and questioning my motives. I understand that. I feel his anger.

But he hasn’t actually challenged any of the facts or analysis in my piece.

Except one: He is arguing that providing the name of a CIA employee – or operative -- is the same as exposing the identity of a CIA covert agent.

Now that may play out in the boondocks among people who have never known anyone who worked at the CIA and who assume that everyone at CIA has a secret identity and works for a CIA front.

But anyone with any knowledge or experience knows that is it doesn’t work like that.

The facts are these: (1) Bob Novak did not say that Valerie Plame was a secret agent; (2) David Corn did; (3) we don’t know who Bob’s sources were; (4) we know David’s source was Joe Wilson.

The rest is commentary.

[Martin]

Cliff May ...have offered the dumbest theory yet. I say "may" b/c someone here could still take the prize.

[flenser]

jukeboxgrad

"It would be a bad thing even if it was "only" accidental and negligent, not deliberate."

That is your opinion, of course. I don't buy it.

"Plame's cover was blown when Novak wrote that she works for the CIA. That's why the CIA, DOJ, FBI and Fitz are all worked up."

Do you have secret sources inside the FitzGerald investigation? If not, then you have no idea what they are investigating.

"Cooper says he knows Plame worked for the CIA because Rove told him."

That is not information in Coopers leaked email. Again, if you have additional information, let me know.

"Also now we know that Rove also leaked to Novak (in the form of confirming something for Novak)"

More speculation on your part. Did Novak confirm it to Rove, or Rove to Novak? If you want to claim that Rove leaked to Novak, then how did Rove find out? Who leaked to Rove?

"Point me toward the references indicating that major folks on the right were recently all worked up over those "other instances." Oh, I get it. You're only suddenly worked up about them as an attempt to distract attention from Rove."

In fact, nothing makes me happier than to see the frothing moonbats investing time and energy in this. I'm hear to stoke the fires, not to shut you down.

"It would help if you were more specific. For example, maybe you're trying to say that Cooper's email has some suspicious superscripts."

What we have seen is selectivly leaked testimony. Whether it is accurate and what it means in the context of the other testimony is unknown.

"Let us know why Rove needed to take advantage of "double super secret background" in order to carry on his noble work of "point[ing] out Democrats lies."

Again, if you have insider info, please share. Exactly what Coopers email means is unclear. Did Rove or Cooper make it "double super secret backgound"? What does that mean in any case?

"While you're at it, let us know the factual basis for Rove's claim (according to Cooper) that Plame "authorized" Wilson's trip."

Same question, do you have inside info? Do you know who authorized Wilsons trip? If not, why do you say it is false?

[Martin]

"If not, then you have no idea what they are investigating."

You're wrong there Flenser. From Fitzgerald's own mouth, he's looking into "potential retaliation against a whistleblower". Again I ask, who's the whistleblower?

The WSJ says it Rove. Do you?

[jerry]

Something to consider:

Over an eventful 3 day period(June 1-3 2004): Tenet reportedly had a loud argument with George W and then resigned, Plame's boss (Pavitt) also retired as he had previously announced, grand jury witnesses were reported to say that George W was aware of the post-July 6 Plame leak strategy, and George W first contacted his lawyer Jim Sharp.

What motivated the fight, whose grand jury testimony was reported, and why was Sharp hired?

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=32&num=4629

[flenser]

"So when Fitzgerald said: "This case is not about a whistle-blower," "It's about potential retaliation against a whistle-blower.""

That is a fascinating question. Who is the whistleblower in all this? Certainly not Wilson or Plame.

If anyone is a whistelblower here it looks like Rove or Novak.

[Seven Machos]

Marty -- This is an easy one: "It's about potential retaliation against a whistle-blower."

Rove is the whistleblower.

As for the brain-damaged barbecue: As leftists like yourself have proven beyond any possible doubt time and again, you are clearly our intellectual betters. What's mystifying to me is why you can't seem to win elections and why Republicans are completely controlling the political and intellectual agenda. I mean, if you are so smart and so good, why won't people vote for you? Must be frustrating, huh, Marty?

[Martin]

Go on Flenser...tell me more. Elaborate at length. Psychosis fascinates me.

[Martin]

Seven Machos-ok Rove is the whistleblower.

So who retaliated aginst Rove. Please. Spin out your theory.

Who retaliated aginst Rove and how?

[Martin]

And Seven M-even if i was a Republican, I'd still be your intellectual better.

[flenser]

"Wilson has charged that officials made the disclosure in an effort to discredit him."

I hear this a lot. How does knowlege that Wilsons wife works for the CIA discredit him? I seem to recall asking this before, and never getting a response.

If she worked for Saddam, ok, that would discredit him, But CIA?

[flenser]

Martin, who do you think is the whistleblower?

[Martin]

Wilson

[Martin]

"How does knowlege that Wilsons wife works for the CIA discredit him?"

Actually Flenser-I've longed wanted to know this too. But your side started it.

For example, what did this little nugget add to Novak's original column?

[Seven Machos]

Jerry: capitolhillblue.com is a written by nutjobs for nutjobs.

Linking to proven liars like The New York Times is one thing but, please, we have to draw the line somewhere. Let's be civil.

[Martin]

Just kidding btw. You may very well be smart in real life and just imitating a witless goofball online. So peace bro'

[flenser]

Martin

If Wilson is the whistleblower, a few questions.

1) What whistle did he blow? What previously concealed information did he bring out?

2) If Wilson was "retaliated" against, what form did that retaliation take? Other than going on the lecture circuit, publish a book, and being treated like a hero for badmouthing Bush, what has happened to him in the last few years?

[Martin]

Flense-I'm going to answer you but answer this as well:

If Rove is the whistleblower, a few questions.

1) What whistle did he blow? What previously concealed information did he bring out?

2) If Rove was "retaliated" against, what form did that retaliation take? Other than being the shadow president, what has happened to him in the last few years?

[Seven Machos]

Oh, Marty, I have no doubt that you are intellectually superior to ignorant little me. Your ability to argue without using actual reasoning, but by hurling conclusion after conclusion has more than convinced me of your brilliance. I wish you could bottle it.

I really hate to waste precious keystrokes here but, basically, who hasn't retaliated against Karl Rove? Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. The CIA. Matt Cooper. The entire East Coast Big Media establishment.

I will say this one more time: no charges will be filed in this strange but frustratingly engaging saga. I venture to say, though, that some day soon, the Left will (again) drop poor, apparently entirely non-self-aware Joe Wilson like a sack of potatoes. It is my fervent hope that, at that time, he will retire for good to his Fairfax split-level forever. Has one man ever been more of a tool?

[Martin]

Rove as victim? The whine is complete.

And Bush himself has new standards in tooldom.

[vnjagvet]

I am sorry, Juke.

I read your stuff, but nowhere do I see that you point to specific evidence that the mere fact that a person named Valerie Plame, the wife of Joseph Wilson, was employed by the CIA was "classified information". What you do is make inferences from inferences and draw conclusions. None of that in my opinion rises to the level of admissible evidence in a court of law.

I take it that your argument that points 2 and 3 are irrelevant means that you have no evidence to support either of those statements.

Your argument, as I now understand it, is that Rove's confirmation to Novak and Cooper that Ms. Plame worked for the CIA in some capacity violates the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.

If that is your position, how do you prove That the person making the disclosure (Rove) knew, at the time he made it, either:

(1) That "the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States"; or

2) "learns the identity of [the] covert agent [Plame]through his [Rove's] access to classified information; or

3) discloses the identity of a covert agent "in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States."

Please specify the evidence on which you rely to prove one of the three requirements.

This the first question on is your law school exam on Federal Criminal Law, Juke. It is open book. Good luck.

[Seven Machos]

Karl Rove told a reporter that a high-profile, non-elected government official was making false accusations in an attempt to undercut the Iraq war effort, and for partisan advantage domestically. Perhaps, Marty, you don't understand what the term "whistleblower" means.

Also, I am glad to know that the Republican party has one somewhat bright member in Karl Rove. We have one guy with some brains. At least we got that going for us.

[flenser]

Martin

If you were going to respond you would have done so. The fact that you posted questions in stead sugests you will not respond.

1) Roves previously concealed information was that Wilson was lying abour rhat he found in Iraq. As detailed in Coopers email. I quote; "not only the genesis of the trip is flawed an[d] suspect but so is the report. he [Rove] implied strongly there's still plenty to implicate iraqi interest in acquiring uranium fro[m] Niger... "

2) The "potential retaliation" to use FitzGeralds term, is the attempt to convict Rove of various crimes, up to and including treason.

Your turn. Since you have ten times the brain power of we Rethuglicans I'm sure you can make a much better case that it is Wilson.

Seven, at least he did not call you a shitstain. Count yourself lucky. That's how these intellectual liberals express themselves you know.

[flenser]

Must .. spell .. check ..